what 70-300mm lens should i buy?

[TeddTucker]

I have a canon rebel XTi and i'm looking to purchase a nice telephoto lens. there are 3 that i'm considering and i would love your feedback:

Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00004THCZ/sr/ref=pd_cp_e_3/002-1695200-4644824?ie=UTF8&qid=1183479965&sr=1-1&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-41&pf_rd_r=1CZ6VEDFDXYX8C5A02QJ&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_p=250314001&pf_rd_i=B0007Y794O)

Tamron AF70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro Lens (http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-AF70-300mm-4-5-6-Macro-Cameras/dp/B000EXOXVA/ref=sr_1_5/002-1695200-4644824?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1183479357&sr=1-5)

Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG APO Macro Telephoto (http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-70-300mm-4-5-6-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B000ALLMI8/ref=pd_bbs_9/002-1695200-4644824?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1183425015&sr=8-9)

i'm a beginner, so cost is a huge factor and these range $150 - $210. What do you guys think i should get?

[jwhite]

I think when I originally got my Sigma, it was the better one of the bunch. Not sure if it still is or what others think of it. I really liked mine when I first got it, and it also does 1:2 macro shots.

I'm actually wanting to sell it because I don't use it anymore with my Canon 70-200mm. The only times would be if I wanted a macro shot of something. i would be willing to part with it for a fairly cheap price. It is in excellent condition.

Jason

I have a canon rebel XTi and i'm looking to purchase a nice telephoto lens. there are 3 that i'm considering and i would love your feedback:

Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00004THCZ/sr/ref=pd_cp_e_3/002-1695200-4644824?ie=UTF8&qid=1183479965&sr=1-1&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-41&pf_rd_r=1CZ6VEDFDXYX8C5A02QJ&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_p=250314001&pf_rd_i=B0007Y794O)

Tamron AF70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro Lens (http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-AF70-300mm-4-5-6-Macro-Cameras/dp/B000EXOXVA/ref=sr_1_5/002-1695200-4644824?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1183479357&sr=1-5)

Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG APO Macro Telephoto (http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-70-300mm-4-5-6-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B000ALLMI8/ref=pd_bbs_9/002-1695200-4644824?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1183425015&sr=8-9)

i'm a beginner, so cost is a huge factor and these range $150 - $210. What do you guys think i should get?

[coldrain]

The best reults at 300mm you will get with the Sigma 70-300 APO DG macro.
So, go for that one.

[DonSchap]

I have the very TAMRON you are asking about and the focus speed of the AF70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD (http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/70300_di_a017.asp) is nothing to write home about. The TAMRON is four-ounces lighter than the Sigma, but that's not a big deal. So I cave to the heavier Sigma APO ... which Coldrain supports.

I know it may seem that I am painting with a broadbrush, here, bit it seems to me that all the 70-300mm lenses have a slower than usual response in this area, even the higher priced EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=150&modelid=11922).

In fact ... if Coldrain would be so kind as to make a clear comment on the Sigma's focus speed, even I would appreciate it. :D

If you need serious focus speed to target, only a 70-200mm can do that with real flair ... and yes, you will pay for it.

[Rhys]

I would not recommend a 70-300. It's long and dark.

I recommend something shorter like a 70-200.

If you can swing it the 70-200 f4L has a great following.

Personally I have the 70-300 f4-5.6 IS Canon.

[DonSchap]

Yeah, since he brought it up, I'm with 'Rhys' on this one, for sure. I rarely pull out the 70-300mm for anything, these days. It is a low cost lens with range. You simply have to make compromises to shoot with it.

In fact, we had a major discussion about the value of this lens, at one point, last year. If you can swing (double the cost) a 70-200mm f/4 (I know several young folks that have opted for this), you'll tend to be a lot happier in the long run with your photographic results. Faster focus, brighter lens from one end to the other ... and it doesn't change shape, like the 70-300mmm does. All zooming and focusing takes place inside the lens body. It doesn't rotate the filter-ring, which means your polarizer-setting stays were you set it.

26126


The 70-300mm, for the most part, is an outdoor lens. You just have to have some serious light when you are going from 180mm and beyond, because the lens chops it down so quick. You can get by with a 70-200 f/4, indoors, but a flash sure would help out.

The fact is: whenever you haul a lens indoors, you usually need a wider maximum aperture, if you plan on shooting under the ambient lighting you'll find there. That's the very reason they make the f/2.8 lenses ... and why they cost a small mint. They are usually heavier, larger in diameter, and offer a tighter depth of field.

You have your budget and that is understandable ... but if you really want snappy looking results without going nuts, on a Canon, the EF 70-200 f/4L USM is your best bet for the price (roughly $525). I suspect you'll get a few more "keepers" from this lens, than the no-particular-manufacturer 70-300mm f/anything.

At any rate, if you go 75-300mm f/4-5.6 (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=150&modelid=7445) or 70-200mm f/4 (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=150&modelid=7345), consider buying an external flash (430EX (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=141&modelid=11923) or 580EX (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=141&modelid=14998)), because when you go indoors ... you're most likely going to need it. ;)

[drama]

Of the three you have listed, the Sigma is the best

sample shots here
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29900

But I agree with Rhys & Don Schap that a 70 200 will be a better buy, if you can afford it

[nqjudo]

A given person will like or dislike any given lens based on personal preference and which of the technical aspects of their photography the lens satisfies. Maybe knowing how, where and when you plan on using the lens will get you the specifics that you are looking for rather than general chatter that may be of no use to you.

All of the lenses you mention are fine depending on your needs. Personally I do a lot of outdoor nature photography. The Canon 70 - 300 IS is probably the lens that I use the most and it will probably stay that way for a while. Even though it is a little slow in the long end the IS more than makes up for it for my purposes. Good luck!

[TeddTucker]

thanks for the responses. i do most (90%) of my photography outside. i like doing landscapes and wildlife. So zoom distance is a major factor when i can't too close to the animal.

[DonSchap]

I, on the other hand, do 90% of my stuff indoors ... and as I stated earlier, the 70-300mm stays in the bag more often than not. I wind up using the TAMRON AF18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di-II LD (http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/assets/pdfs/spec_sheets/18-250mm.pdf) as the "quick grab" lens and keep it routinely mounted on the SONY A100, as it makes a terrific combination with the SONY's in-the-body Image Stabilization.

Last year I reached deep, dragged out the serious dough and got the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM for my Canon EOS 20D to fulfill the need of medium to long range, indoor lensing. I could not see trying to make due with an f/4 version. There just isn't enough light in the room, usually.

It was a commitment to my photography and was not made lightly. Over the past year, that particular lens has been the mainstay of my photography, upon which all other lens are decided upon. It took some time to round it all up, but it winds up being a pretty good selection to tote with me. The use of IS in low-light conditions and scoped beyond 120mm can not be overstated. It can make or break a shot.

Outdoor shooting doesn't require nearly the same level of greed for light. The sun is usually quite accommodating. A "darker" lens (f/4 and up) is quite at home ... out there.

Best choice based on your recent definition I could suggest would be the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_70300_456is/index.htm). I suggest forgetting the cheaper Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III. It will only disappoint you when you shoot long. It is my experience that IS is definitely a consideration from 120-300mm. Is it worth the extra money? You bet! :D

I am finding, though, that my favorite outdoor lens is the TAMRON SP AF200-500mm f/5-6.3 Di LD (http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/assets/pdfs/spec_sheets/200-500mmDi.pdf). It has tremendous reach and doesn't weigh as much as my 70-200. You want to get to the animals ... they'll never know you were there, with this lens.

Good luck with whatever choice you make. :cool:

[Zeva]

sorry for being a complete idiot but what would you consider this lens? I dont know my lenses very well.... well i was just wondering if it was like a macro telephoto wide angel or just a all around lens thanks!

[Rhys]

thanks for the responses. i do most (90%) of my photography outside. i like doing landscapes and wildlife. So zoom distance is a major factor when i can't too close to the animal.

70-300 won't get you close enough then.

I suggest something more powerful like a 400mm prime lens.

[nqjudo]

HHHmmm Agreeing with DonS a lot lately. I agree that you should avoid the cheaper 75 - 300 in favour of the 70 - 300 IS USM and possibly avoid all the lower end lenses altogether. The 70 - 300 IS sounds like it could be the lens for you. If you could wait a while to accommodate a little bit higher end lens in your budget you'll probably be much better off, particularly if you think that you will advance beyond the capabilities of the lower end lenses quickly. There's not much sense in spending good money after bad.

You don't have to spend tons of money to get a decent product. Like everything consumable, there is a point of diminishing returns as you climb the price ladder. With photography, mid-range products are often much closer to high end products than they are to the true entry-level stuff. You could be very well served by waiting till you could accommodate a few more hundred dollars in your budget. As a plus, a good lens will retain a higher resale value than the cheap stuff should you decide not to pursue SLR photography. Good luck!

[Viky]

70-300 won't get you close enough then.

I suggest something more powerful like a 400mm prime lens.

I don't think this advice would be useful here coz the thread opener clearly stated this in his opening post:


i'm a beginner, so cost is a huge factor and these range $150 - $210. What do you guys think i should get?

The canon 400mm f/4 is priced around $5300... which comes to around 30 TIMES his proposed budget:eek::eek::eek:

[TeddTucker]

a 300mm will not allow me to get close enough to wildlife? i live in Canada so i want it for bear, coyotes, moose, deer, ... if 300mm is not going to work for what i want to do with it, then i might just hold wait (a couple years) so i can afford something more powerful. but i would rather buy a 300mm and use the extra money for vacations

[coldrain]

sorry for being a complete idiot but what would you consider this lens? I dont know my lenses very well.... well i was just wondering if it was like a macro telephoto wide angel or just a all around lens thanks!
A 70-300 is a tele zoom lens. The Sigma has a 1:2 macro setting, making it possible to focus closer than normal.

[DonSchap]

sorry for being a complete idiot but what would you consider this lens? I dont know my lenses very well.... well i was just wondering if it was like a macro telephoto wide angel or just a all around lens thanks!

Zeva ... which lens were you trying to define? :confused: For clarity sake, you didn't say.

[coldrain]

Zeva ... which lens were you trying to define? :confused: For clarity sake, you didn't say.
In a thread called "what 70-300mm lens should i buy?" I can understand you are puzzled, Don :p;):rolleyes:

[coldrain]

Tedd, take the more expensive lens recommendations for what they are... not relevant.
Just get a Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 APO DG macro for now. This will give you the possibility to at least make photos, with optics that are not half bad either.
It will give you experience too. And then in future, when funds allow, you can always decide on a different lens. And then you also have a better idea about what is what, lens wise.

[Mark_48]

Canon 75-300 f/4-5.6 III, not the best lens I own, but not the worst either. Here are a couple sample shots I took when I was playing around to see what it could do. Both have no PP other than a resize for posting and a 100% crop of the 300mm shot. One is at 75mm for a reference to the distance of the scene and the other was shot at 300mm and a 100% crop pulled out. I had bought the Canon lens for use with a film body and it was good enough at the time. I've got a feeling the Sigma mentioned would probably be a better choice compared to the Canon.

[Mark_48]

300mm with 100% crop

[DonSchap]

In a thread called "what 70-300mm lens should i buy?" I can understand you are puzzled, Don :p;):rolleyes:


As my "creative editor", 'Coldrain', I can see where this is going. :cool:

'Zeva' mentioned wide angle ...

sorry for being a complete idiot but what would you consider this lens? I dont know my lenses very well.... well i was just wondering if it was like a macro telephoto wide-angle or just a all around lens thanks!

... in my prior positing, I mentioned the 18-250mm lens ... so I was no longer certain to which lens he might be referring and requested he define it.

The 70-300mm range is considered the "standard" telephoto zoom from many years ago.

You can effectively do with a 70-200 on an "APS-C sensored" digital camera what you used to do with a 70-300mm on a 35mm film-based camera. That is to say: Due to the digital cropping factor the smaller digital sensors introduce, the images would be basically the same size in the frame at 200mm on the digital as they are at 300mm on the film.

Just to clear up that point.

[Rhys]

One word of caution. I had a Tamron 70-300 and while it was OK most of the time, it did seem to correspond with ERR99s on my XT. It wasn't predictable which surprised me. Trust me... Canon glass works best with Canon cameras.If you must save pennies now to spend a lot more later then try the Canon 70-300 non IS.

[nqjudo]

Tedd, take the more expensive lens recommendations for what they are... not relevant.

Coldrain - I usually think that much of what you say is quite correct but I can't be on board with you on this one. Neither you, I or anyone else on this forum can say what advice may be relevant because there are so many unknowns about the O.P. As per his post, he is a beginner. Beginners are often their own worst enemies because they don't know what questions to ask or how to ask them. There is nothing irrelevant about providing the maximum information possible to someone who may be leading themselves astray without knowing it.

No one knows, nor would they dare to ask about why the budget is what it is. It could be that the O.P. simply can't afford more or he is simply unwilling to spend more out of concern that he might not stick with photography. In the case of the former, I am certain that all of the 'more expensive' advice was given with much sensitivity and with the full understanding that enough advice would be given about the specific products that were enquired upon by other members. In the case of the latter, one would definitely benefit by following this advice. I don't know how many times that I have seen people enter into various hobbies with the lowest possible cost equipment and quickly become frustrated because of it. It's a fact of life. It's more pleasant to work with a quality product that produces good, consistent results and entry-level stuff doesn't cut it all too often. Again, the advice given wasn't about blowing a life savings on equipment. It was about spending a little more to get a lot more. That doesn't seem irrelevant to me. If someone who knew absolutely nothing about cars and asked me if they should buy a Lada or a Pinto, rest assured that I would be telling them about every other car available and I think it would be completely relevant - even if they hadn't asked.

[coldrain]

Thank you for your well thought out and polite post, nqjudo. A welcome fresh breath from what seems to be the norm lately.
The reason I found the posts to be irrelevant is because the OP stated that his budget clearly.

I do agree that posts that say, that for quality reasons, he might, if possible, look at more expensive lenses. But posts that say, forget about all these lenses and just go for a $600+ lens, I find those irrelevant... They only take the poster's situation into consideration, not the OP's situation.

That is the reason I wrote that.

[nqjudo]

Coldrain - Well, thanks to you. You know, I've never been loyal to any forum beyond 20 or so posts. There's just too many people around who seem to have no other goal in life other than making things difficult for others - the main reason why I no longer visit POTN. Not that there aren't some good folks over here though.

I haven't personally experienced any rude behaviour here but I'm sorry to hear that you have had the unfortunate experience. Anyone should be able to see that the only way to benefit from this forum is by putting forth efforts to make it a better place for all. It's kind of like downloading a torrent file. If there are too many leeches and not enough seeders, the whole thing becomes useless for the entire community.

[Rhys]

I have a canon rebel XTi and i'm looking to purchase a nice telephoto lens. there are 3 that i'm considering and i would love your feedback:

Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00004THCZ/sr/ref=pd_cp_e_3/002-1695200-4644824?ie=UTF8&qid=1183479965&sr=1-1&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-41&pf_rd_r=1CZ6VEDFDXYX8C5A02QJ&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_p=250314001&pf_rd_i=B0007Y794O)

Tamron AF70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro Lens (http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-AF70-300mm-4-5-6-Macro-Cameras/dp/B000EXOXVA/ref=sr_1_5/002-1695200-4644824?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1183479357&sr=1-5)

Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG APO Macro Telephoto (http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-70-300mm-4-5-6-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B000ALLMI8/ref=pd_bbs_9/002-1695200-4644824?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1183425015&sr=8-9)

i'm a beginner, so cost is a huge factor and these range $150 - $210. What do you guys think i should get?

Given a limited budget I would say go for the Canon because the others are liable to have compatibility issues. Also your Canon camera is guaranteed to work with Canon lenses while others might void the warranty - check the handbook.

[coldrain]

You will not have compatibility issues with the Sigma, nor will any warranty be void, no matter what lens you choose.

[DonSchap]

So ... wrapping up ... which 70-300mm did "TeddTucker" wind up getting?

The TAMRON?
26857


Is the jury still out? :confused:

[TeddTucker]

the jury is still out. my next paycheck is going to be the deciding factor. i'm leaning towards the sigma, but if i have enough im springing for the canon 300mm with IS. i'l post some pics once i make a purchase